- Oct 2, 2012
- 19,497
- 21,165
This & repped. I actually will agree with this point. I would say do bad, but they weren't doing the best numbers. The KD line didn't really take off until the second half of the KD IV releases. In addition the KD V, weren't exactly flying off shelves. The KD VI is what changed the game.No it wont ruin the company. That's a drop in the bucket. Like Chris Rock said, if someone can give you that much imagine how much they're making. UA has to prove to the market and buyers that they can produce a shoe that has casual appeal. Although they'll already make their money once stores order product, the people will decide if Durant has appeal outside of Nike. Until the Nerf IV, Durant's line did bad at retail. It's a deal that they'll certainly regret if they don't see their share of the market increase.It's an absurd deal that could ruin the company. Unless UA has somehow convinced Nikes best designers to switch to the dark side....I don't see it.
Regardless of who becomes the face of Nike basketball....the advertising/marketing campaigns and cutting edge design> who actually wears the shoes...
An athletes endorsement always helps, but if the shoes are pleasing to the eye, they will move.
Last edited: